Pentax: Two new compact film cameras planned - Pentax 17 announced June 2024

[Cholentpot]

I was under the impression that it did pretty good.

 

[Lachlan Young]

I was under the impression that it did pretty good.

It has by all accounts I've heard.

I think the situation is that Ricoh/ Pentax are trying to make a coherent roadmap in a market that is extremely diverse in terms of products wanted relative to absolute demand for any given product - and that tooling up something like a 645 or 67 compatible SLR-type body would require a very major financial outlay, relative to their current parts bin - and which realistically might have to sell for Leica M6 money. And that they might be trying to readjust a bit after losing the person who drove the project initially.

 

[analogwisdom]

It has by all accounts I've heard.

I think the situation is that Ricoh/ Pentax are trying to make a coherent roadmap in a market that is extremely diverse in terms of products wanted relative to absolute demand for any given product - and that tooling up something like a 645 or 67 compatible SLR-type body would require a very major financial outlay, relative to their current parts bin - and which realistically might have to sell for Leica M6 money. And that they might be trying to readjust a bit after losing the person who drove the project initially.

At B&H in 1999, a brand new Pentax 67ii with the 105mm f/2.4 was $1949.99, which is about $3700 adjusted for inflation.

People had a conniption about the $500 Pentax 17, I can't imagine the reaction those types would have about a nearly $4000 medium format SLR.

 

[Hassasin]

At B&H in 1999, a brand new Pentax 67ii with the 105mm f/2.4 was $1949.99, which is about $3700 adjusted for inflation.

People had a conniption about the $500 Pentax 17, I can't imagine the reaction those types would have about a nearly $4000 medium format SLR.

Well, the Pentax 17 was certainly not worth more than half its price, and at the same time it seems some folks prefer a "new" camera vs far superior older one, no matter the cost. To put in perspective, if a new Holgas still sees at their price point, P17 suddenly is not all that pricy ?

If Ricoh cannot revive P645 production as it once was and new tooling would be required, I see it a suicide business decision. I'd rather have Ricoh focus on mono digital gear, get a P645D or Z out in Mono version.

On another note, the actual shortage in film cameras is super wide, in the style of Linhof Technorama 612/617. Nothing too complex and the market is there when the price is right. At 6k (used) for Linhof ought to be possible to beat rather handily.

 

[Disconnekt]

At B&H in 1999, a brand new Pentax 67ii with the 105mm f/2.4 was $1949.99, which is about $3700 adjusted for inflation.

People had a conniption about the $500 Pentax 17, I can't imagine the reaction those types would have about a nearly $4000 medium format SLR.

Add on top of that the pages of complaints of people saying: "well, they didn't add the one very specific thing that only *I* wanted so it's a flop/I'm not buying it"

 

[Hassasin]

Add on top of that the pages of complaints of people saying: "well, they didn't add the one very specific thing that only *I* wanted so it's a flop/I'm not buying it"

They put out a VERY expensive P&S film camera for it was, price was suggestive of "features" and virtually none came.

 

[analogwisdom]

Well, the Pentax 17 was certainly not worth more than half its price, and at the same time it seems some folks prefer a "new" camera vs far superior older one, no matter the cost. To put in perspective, if a new Holgas still sees at their price point, P17 suddenly is not all that pricy ?

If Ricoh cannot revive P645 production as it once was and new tooling would be required, I see it a suicide business decision. I'd rather have Ricoh focus on mono digital gear, get a P645D or Z out in Mono version.

On another note, the actual shortage in film cameras is super wide, in the style of Linhof Technorama 612/617. Nothing too complex and the market is there when the price is right. At 6k (used) for Linhof ought to be possible to beat rather handily.

I think instead of a Holga, a better comparison to the P17 would be the $800 Rollei (Mint) 35AF, no?

 

[Hassasin]

I think instead of a Holga, a better comparison to the P17 would be the $800 Rollei (Mint) 35AF, no?

To me all of it goes into same category, it's about relative pricing to overall built. In that sense Holgas are no cheaper.

 

[Steven Lee]

WARNING: what follows is the uninformed guess based on limited personal experience/observations:

While film photography market has grown quite a bit in recent years, my opinion is that it's dominated by people with no money: curious perpetually broke college students and retirees living on fixed income and already have more gear that they have a use for. I have quite a few high-earning photography enthusiasts in my network who have no problems dropping $3-5K on "AI-based autofocus with precapture at 30fps" every year, with equal amount on accessories and even more on photo travel. None of them are interested in film.

I suspect a single 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Sony zoom generated more revenue than all film photography related businesses world-wide, Instax excluded.

 

[MattKing]

Other than the announcement of the departure of an important individual, that release is sufficiently vague about the future as to draw any conclusion from it.
It is the sort of thing you would put out if you hadn't decided yet who was going to be the new lead person on an ongoing project, but wanted to quell rumours of the project's demise.
One friend has the camera, and it is a jewel - really well put together.

 

[albireo]

WARNING: what follows is the uninformed guess based on limited personal experience/observations:

While film photography market has grown quite a bit in recent years, my opinion is that it's dominated by people with no money: curious perpetually broke college students and retirees living on fixed income and already have more gear that they have a use for.

Amen.

I think I read somewhere that in many countries film photography has historically been considered a 'working class' hobby - particularly in those countries with an established 'respectable high art backbone', ei an exclusive or semi-exclusive artist-curator-exhibitor-audience circuit perhaps largely populated by the upper classes.

I'm thinking of the UK for example. I'm on a couple of UK based film photography forums and the most active threads on there are along the lines of 'look at this broken bit of junk I've chanced upon for £10 at the local Oxfam's'. Or the threads of nostalgia for those times when one would get a roll of Agfa Precisa 100 for £1 at the local Poundland (Americans: the equivalent of your Dollar Tree). It's almost as if people expect the gear needed for this particular hobby to be cheap and stay cheap forever because it's 'their' hobby.

I suspect the real hobby for these types is instead the bargain hunting, rather than any actual photography, and the millennials ('hipsters') with disposable income dropping some serious dosh on the Mamiya 7s, the Hasselblads and the Leicas (but also, importantly, on the consumables) are raising the prices of used film cameras for everyone and are thus the enemy.

In any case, the amount of vitriol that the Pentax 17 got on those forums was remarkable. I still distinctly remember this guy going

'This sucks etc etc .. I hate Pentax etc etc .. Why would I spend £500 on a Pentax 17 bla bla when I can get a Canon EOS1V for £700"

Which is, IMO, a breathtakingly stupid thing to say if your hobby is photography, though it might make sense if you're just a gadget collector.

 

[loccdor]

Other people's photographic opinions aren't anything to get upset at. Most of it doesn't matter all that much.

 

[Lachlan Young]

I suspect the real hobby for these types is instead the bargain hunting, rather than any actual photography, and the millennials ('hipsters') with disposable income dropping some serious dosh on the Mamiya 7s, the Hasselblads and the Leicas (but also, importantly, on the consumables) are raising the prices of used film cameras for everyone and are thus the enemy.

There's also a key difference in intent - if you are reasonably serious about making work, it's better to spend your money once on something that'll be definitively 'good enough', rather than wasting time on kit that either is excessive in pointless ways or just a pile of electronic-junk-in-potentia.

 

[abruzzi]

IMO the main challenge to any company making a new film camera is the fact that there is still a glut in the market of low priced used cameras. Yes prices have risen--you can no longer get an ETRSi with 120 back, 75mm lens, and WLF for $200 (What I paid for mine in 2015). Today you'll probably pay a little over twice that. But that is still a kit that originally sold for $4-5000. If Pentax made a new fully mechanical K2000 or KX or MX with a 50mm lens. It would cost $2000 or more and it would have priced itself outside the market of people that would want it. While its great to say "yes, but this one has a warranty" the reality is its still far cheaper to just keep buying used MX bodies until you find one that works. Or buy one and send it for CLA. So while I appreciate that some companies are dipping their toes in the water, I really don't expect much. The only areas of film camera manufacturing that seem to be consistantly profitable are instant, low end (i.e. Lomo), or large format.

 

[Cholentpot]

IMO the main challenge to any company making a new film camera is the fact that there is still a glut in the market of low priced used cameras. Yes prices have risen--you can no longer get an ETRSi with 120 back, 75mm lens, and WLF for $200 (What I paid for mine in 2015). Today you'll probably pay a little over twice that. But that is still a kit that originally sold for $4-5000. If Pentax made a new fully mechanical K2000 or KX or MX with a 50mm lens. It would cost $2000 or more and it would have priced itself outside the market of people that would want it. While its great to say "yes, but this one has a warranty" the reality is its still far cheaper to just keep buying used MX bodies until you find one that works. Or buy one and send it for CLA. So while I appreciate that some companies are dipping their toes in the water, I really don't expect much. The only areas of film camera manufacturing that seem to be consistantly profitable are instant, low end (i.e. Lomo), or large format.

High end rangefinders.

 

[multivoiced]

The (perceived) promise of new products from Pentax is the reason why I sold two Contax T2 cameras to KEH last year. Half frame doesn't seem like my thing, but I thought a full-frame equivalent was coming. It seemed too risky to keep Contax cameras that easily break down from age.

 

[Lachlan Young]

High end rangefinders.

And whoever can build a solid, reliable 6x7 RF with an 80/2.8 is probably going to do pretty well.

 

[abruzzi]

High end rangefinders.

maybe. Does anyone else currently manufacture high end rangefinders, or just Leica? I'd also be curious if Leica actually makes a profit on their film camera business. I imagine they don't really lose money, but if they didn't have their digital business would the film cameras be enough to sustain them? The LF universe is suprisingly full with new manufacturers making new stuff from Intrepid at the low end to Gibellini at the high end, and a lot in between.

 

[4season]

I'd like to applaud TKO and team for developing such a "crazy" product: Yes, I bought one!

As I re-read the Kosmo Foto article, and TKO's Instagram, I'm less certain about what it means as far as possible new Pentax film cameras are concerned. In previous videos, TKO has mentioned being older than most folks assume, and mentions age again in his IG farewell.

Whether Ricoh Imaging is satisfied with P17 sales to date, I don't know.

 

[Agulliver]

Remember that KosmoFoto only regurgitates what the owner has read elsewhere. And one of the quotes is from Ricoh saying that TKO's departure doesn't affect the future of their film camera project.

If I recall correctly, the Pentax 17 was the biggest selling camera for the Ricoh/Pentax company last year, accounting for some 20% of it's entire sales. They put it into continuous production due to unexpectedly high demand and the vast majority of reviews from people actually using it are very positive. The negative opinions usually come people on forums who haven't used one and who are deluded enough to think that a modern P&S camera should cost what they did 30 years ago and forgetting both inflation and economy of scale.

Pentax did a survey at the end of 2024 which asked a lot of questions including what camera would people like to see next. The obvious pathway had looked like an autofocus P&S but with Mint/Rollei having launched a product that should plug that gap the way forward may be less obvious now. There is demand for a medium format camera and for a 35mm SLR but would people buy it when it is inevitably not going to be cheap? Looking at what these things cost in 1975 or even 1995 is of zero relevance. Ricoh is still a relatively small company and tooling up to produce another new model will be a significant investment for them which needs to pay for itself.

So the future roadmap likely isn't clear. The Pentax 17 looks to be here to stay a while as it seems to continue to sell in good numbers. It has been a great success, but as for what should come next....that is no longer clear.

 

[Agulliver]

They put out a VERY expensive P&S film camera for it was, price was suggestive of "features" and virtually none came.

It really isn't very expensive. Compared to the item containing a P&S digital camera that nearly all of us carry in our pockets daily. And compared to the price of good quality P&S cameras back in the day when you adjust for inflation and wage inflation.

It is what we must realistically expect such a camera to sell for these days.

 

[loccdor]

New items rarely can compete with the used market if practical utility is the only concern.

My 1999 vehicle is worth $4000. Buying the new model of it today is almost $90,000.

For that money you get a couple touch screens, safety features, a more complicated design that's more expensive to maintain. A less reliable transmission. A few more mpg gas mileage. Something harder to work on yourself. But it's going to be problem-free for at least 5 years. It won't have some new issue (though usually relatively minor) every 6 months. It won't have rips in the seats you put duct tape over.

 

[4season]

If I recall correctly, the Pentax 17 was the biggest selling camera for the Ricoh/Pentax company last year, accounting for some 20% of it's entire sales.

It may have been true at some point in time, but they may also be looking at how sustainable it is.